Skip to main content

About your Search

20100101
20100131
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
, many of them the same companies being vilified in the press and washington as nothing, but greedy grubs. is that fair? hi everybody i'm david asman, welcome to forbes on fox here with us today steve forbes, victoria barrett, rich michael, and neil wineberg and quentin hardy. steven is it time to give credit where credit is due to the companies? >> i think the companies are doing right and it's prer and i hope we make use of companies that are good at logistics, fed ex, wal-mart, handling large supplies quickly. don't expect thanks for it, just as we did not get thanks for what the military did in the tsunami five years ago in the pacific, did a fantastic job and didn't help the image of the united states. it's right to do so-and-so we do it. >> we're the most generous, our private companies and corporations go out of their way to help the poor and devastated. >> and i'm glad they're doing so once again, you know, david, normally i am not for corporate charitable giving because after all, shareholders own a company and shareholders are rarely consulted on corporate giving, but this is a
at scott brown. >> brown, really a republican in step with washington republicans. he will block tougher over site of wall street, give more tax breaks to the wealthiest, apro prescription coverage for even joers and he denies emergency contraception to rape victims. he lacks understanding and seriousness. in times like these we can't afford a republican like scott brown. >> there's an uplifting message. >> i love the limbaugh touch. is this effective? >> no. there's this huge independent vote in massachusetts. the point is this is also familiar you would have to be more magnetic than martha coakley to get away with this assault and invocation. this has been a nonstop attack of trying to associate scott brown with republicans. >> national republicans. >> doesn't help to be marning out with with the widow of ted kennedy which is another one of those things you better be good at. it goes down the krau of independent voters. >> mobilizing core democratic voters. >> republicans can win just by making it close because it will put a scare into democrats nationally. massachusetts is a very, ver
healing powers are asserting themselves and i think if washington would get out of the way this would work out great. >> paul: there's a member, dan, push-me, pull-me message. he says i want you to grow and invest on the other hand, saying i want to pass health care, and cap and trade and raise energy prices and unionize that's going to raise your labor costs. so, if you're a business man or woman and you hear that speech, what message are you getting. >> a mixed message at best, i think, and you know, his primary responsibility is washington and the federal budget is now spending is now up to nearly 25% of gdp. it's just almost a historic high in our time. revenue is down to 14% of gdp in part because of the recession. but between that, you have a massive deficit, pushed by all the spending in the past year. and that is something that the congress is very, very nervous about because of the massachusetts vote, the public is nervous about the size of the deficit. he wanted congress to create a commission, congress refused to do that. he's going to do it on his own and i think that probably
are asserting themselves. i think isef washington would get out of the way this will herk out great. >> reporter: there is a push me-pull you message.great. on the one hand he needs the private sector to grow and wants to. on the other hand he isag saying, i want you to grow and invest. he says i want to passst healthcare that will push new s costs and the cap and trade,ltha that will raise energy prices.nz being unionized will raisebo your labor costs. if you are a businessman orr woman and you hear thatea speech, what message are youspch atving? >> a mixed message at best ies think.k, his primary responsibility is washington.to a the federal budget is spendingsp is up to nearly 25% of gdp. it is almost a historic high in our time. revenue is down to 14% of gdpn in part because of thece but beion. between that you have a a massive deficit pushed by allitp of the spending in the past the year. that is something thats somethi congress is very,ng very nervou about because of theabout b massachusetts vote. massachuse is nervous is nervous abouttt the size of the deficit. he wanted congress to creat
're doing in washington right now is promoting growth and certainly when you raise tax rates on businesses that dopt get employers to hire workers. >> paul: what could be big negative surprises in 2010 economically. >> what worries me, we're creating a bubble in the stock market and people are putting money in the stock market because of low interest rates. .10% and i think it's an artifical in many moves. >> paul: a correction coming, could this be the peak. >> no, i don't think this is the peak, but i think in this year, in 2010, that the stock market will, you know, the public will grow bigger and then-- >> all right, when we come back from obama's afghan surge to iran's troubled regime, a look at stories sure to make headlines across the globe in the year ahead. o >> from the left opposition to the afghan surge to iran's continued nuclear defiance, a world of troubles awaits the administration as the new year begins. and jason, particularly iran where democratic protests are continuing below the surface, but clearly very powerful. at the same time that iran continues to defy world op
word, washington perfect ses word whachl it means is try to get parts of the bill through with 51 votes. not 60 as they have tried to get needed in the past. is that likely? >> right, well that entails starting over. it's the same thing for another option, which is a stripped down bill where you might see a modest coverage expansion. some insurance -- well, reforms is what they're called in the beltway. but they're destructive. but that really requires you to go back to the committees and can it if you can't hold hearings, hold votes. they have to decide if they want to spend another two months, three months on a health care plan that is really unpopular and the well is poisoned in a lot of ways. or just do nothing and move to jobs and that budget. >> the other option, i think probably their best one would be to take doug shown's advice. go back to republican if you can get 10 on a stripped-down bill and try to pass that and value sage something are from that. is that possible? >> i think it is possible. if -- it will be difficult for the reason that ken suggest that had there are lib b
are talking about, joe, senate reconciliation, a buzz word, washington process word. what it means is trying to get some parts of the bill through with 51 votes, not 60, as they have tried to get needed in the past. is that likely? >> right. well, that basically entails starting over. it's the same thing for another option which is a stripped down bill where you might see a modest coverage expansion, so insurance, well, reforms is what they're called in the beltway. >> paul: right. >> they're pretty destructive, but at that really requires you to go back to the committees, it's not hold hearings, at least hold votes and there's all sorts of paradal trip wires everywhere and they have to decide if they want to spend another two months, three months on a health care plan that's really unpopular and the well is poisoned in a lot of ways or just do nothing and move to jobs and austerity budget. >> paul: dan, the other option, i think probably the best one politically, would be to take doug shone's advice, go back to republicans, see if you can get a half dozen or maybe ten or so on a stripped do
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)